In Paris buildings were taxed by the number of stories. The story squeezed in under the mansard roof was exempted from taxation. It would be unusual to find a mansard roof without windows, at least in the city where it became famous.
Apr 20, 16 5:04 pm ·
·
Citizen, I know what a mansard roof looks like. I was at the University of Oregon that has a very prominent example of Second Empire architecture.
Aside from that, thanks Aluminate. Given the particular neighborhood where the building is located are all typical tract development / suburban ranch style. Just take a google street view of the neighborhood.
I still suspect the house was not originally built this way.
It is an unusual combination of the mansard roof, the front elevation wall system, etc. It's definitely an odd ball which I think everyone would agree with.
Apr 20, 16 6:09 pm ·
·
There used to be a Second Empire school building just to the west of me on Franklin Ave.
I do not think it was a house to begin with. To me, it looks like some type of commercial building that was turned into a house. Maybe all those houses around it were not there 50-60 years ago.
No. Mansard roofs are ugly. Also this conversation. What. The. Hell?
Apr 20, 16 7:21 pm ·
·
z1111, of course none of them.
I'm not going into Auburn, WA to dig into their archives of photos of the neighborhood. There are telltale signs. There are quite a few houses there from the 50s/60s. Many have been remodeled. There is probably some information somewhere to support records of housing development.
Another give away for the time period of the 1950s/60s is the school. A common pattern of the time is that the school was built at its location after housing started being developed in that area. After all, it isn't in the downtown Auburn (technically the older part of Auburn) to the North as Auburn population grew to the south and southwest. A little history context, the housing was probably driven by Boeing. With Boeing building its sheet metal mill facilities and other facilities, was an economic 'fuel' to bring people to that area and the housing development occured along side all the industrial use of land.
Before hand, these tracts were farm land.
I don't have a complete historic context picture but just from a little quick & dirty research on the historic context of the area.
Yall need to smoke some weed and CHILL THE FUX OUT!!!
Apr 20, 16 7:42 pm ·
·
Josh and Donna,
I think we'll just agree to disagree. Mansard roofs is like the color orange. You can love or hate it but seldom just like it. It can be done horribly and therefore, ugly as fuck. It can sometimes be employed in a decent manner.
I saw Donna's; this was aimed @ Josh's. The two images I posted weren't to defend ugly roofs (rooves?) ... just to note that we often use the term without clarifying that (in the US) we're usually talking about crappy fakes, not the real item.
I'm referring to the crappy fakes, otherwise known as 99% of mansards in America.
Apr 20, 16 11:26 pm ·
·
I wouldn't know if it's 99% but I would agree that most of the time, mansard roofs used in post-Second Empire style is often poorly executed and often results in ugly design.
Take note of the 1979 RENOVATION date indicated on this property. They probably aren't talking about minor remodels such as change of doors or change of windows within existing window openings. They are probably talking major renovations creating significant change in the face.
1979 is about right for the type of aggregate tilt up panels. This darker tone aggregate tilt up panels were popular in the 1970s while in the 60s, lighter tones were typically popular.
The B&W photo was probably 1979. In the 10-15 years after, the cedar shingles/shakes didn't grey out yet. By the 2000s the cedar shingles / shakes had begun to weather and lose its luster while the original owner who lived there had probably kept applying water sealer to protect the luster but over time, that stop being used and it dulled out to the darker brown color it is now and will begin to get more 'greyish-dark brown' over time.
Examples of major renovations that would be denoted on such a county records is major changes to the facade/elevation on the front, changes in the roof and other alterations that are physically significant and substantially visible and character changing/altering.
I think I found a clue in that mess.
Apr 21, 16 5:44 am ·
·
Here's my theory of what happened: circa 1979
An attached garage was built (either replacing a carport or parking space to enclose a car). The front facade was changed out and a new front elevation was made. A new roof system was made replacing the old roof system (probably some kind of low pitch hip roof) with a mansard-ish style roof.
Apr 21, 16 6:00 am ·
·
Actually, took another pass through the photos, it does look like some time in the 90s, they changed out the cedar shakes with something else (probably some kind of composition shingle). That was probably done before they 'grey'd out because of possible fire related concerns of wood shakes/shingles.
That pretty much covers a correction to the post I made April 21, 5:44AM (forum date/time stamp EST).
I've worked on a few perfectly nice Mansards/Second Empire style homes in the northeast US, built in the mid-late 1800's, following their popularity in France. To say they are all ugly shows a narrow viewpoint as to what good architecture looks like. Most modern architecture looks like crap to me, soulless self-important expressionism that it is, but that doesn't mean that it IS ugly, just that I don't like it.
They have been continuously built since their popularity in France. There is a perfectly fine example near my home that was built in 1962.
Apr 21, 16 12:02 pm ·
·
N_S,
It's not meant to really knock on orange. I'm using the colloquial phrase as an example base to illustrate the point. I have nothing against orange, just so you know.
They haven't been as popular between the time frame of the Second Empire and the 1960-present neo-eclecticism. If you take note, this neighborhood of tract development was ranch style and all of them in that area of Auburn is probably post-WW II. If you note the 1979 renovation. This leads me to the belief the house was originally built as a ranch style. The front facade was changed dramatically as well as the roof form that is typical (my guess is hip roof) of ranch style into this mansard roof type. That B&W photo at the County Assessor's website (for that county of course), is probably circa-1979. Older photos of the house is probably in an 'special collections' kind of archive or is microfiched. My guess is that county didn't go through all the microfiche rolls to put photos and other information on their website.
There was a minor remodel in the mid to late 1990s, probably change of windows, some interior remodeling of the bathroom and kitchen and things like that. The 1979 renovation is probably referring to more major alterations like addition of an attached garage, change of the rood form and change of the front elevation.
The original cedar shakes/shingles on the mansard was still fairly cedar 'orange-ish' color by the 1990s (1990-1995 time frame given the model of cars in the photo and their style).That's only 10-15 years roughly. If it was built originally in the 1950s, with that roof form, I would argue that would would be 38-45 years. The cedar shingles/shakes would have weathered. In 1997, the cedar shakes/shingles were replaced with some kind of composite or was laid over the cedar. There was some other minor remodel work but at $7500, it wouldn't have been major. Replace some windows with vinyl windows. Replace some shingles/shakes and maybe a tiny remodeling of the bathrooms and kitchen (possibly).
The circa-1979 renovation was also noted and I suspect is more significant. To verify, I would argue for circa 1979 building permits & associated documents/drawings/etc. would need to be located for that property at the City Hall building department. There's no guarantee to find anything. Cities and counties typically had 'memory' problems for things prior to the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s (depends on the place, though).
My gut feeling is that the house was originally built as a modest suburban ranch style house. In the late 70s (circa-1979), the roof was changed from its original roof form to this mansard roof form. The front elevation was changed and some indication implies an attached garage was made. Whether it was originally a car port or just a spot where a car could park... I can't say definitively either way.
who fucking cares balkans. its shit. are you going to do any renovations on the place? its close to you. as a building designer, this should be right in your wheelhouse.
but that would require actual work on your part. so nevermind
Nice one dangermouse. Over 130 posts on a topic you can guarantee that Balkins is blasting diarrhea all over it.
The OP is actually a great craftsman. While he picked the biggest POS known to man he may turn it into something passable.
Apr 21, 16 2:08 pm ·
·
Dangermouse,
Currently, I already have a project. As for the OP, if he really wants to commission me, he can always contact me. I still have to decide if decent passable outcome can be achieved.
Can you identify this house style?
In Paris buildings were taxed by the number of stories. The story squeezed in under the mansard roof was exempted from taxation. It would be unusual to find a mansard roof without windows, at least in the city where it became famous.
Citizen, I know what a mansard roof looks like. I was at the University of Oregon that has a very prominent example of Second Empire architecture.
Aside from that, thanks Aluminate. Given the particular neighborhood where the building is located are all typical tract development / suburban ranch style. Just take a google street view of the neighborhood.
I still suspect the house was not originally built this way.
It is an unusual combination of the mansard roof, the front elevation wall system, etc. It's definitely an odd ball which I think everyone would agree with.
There used to be a Second Empire school building just to the west of me on Franklin Ave.
It was a mansard roof.
I do not think it was a house to begin with. To me, it looks like some type of commercial building that was turned into a house. Maybe all those houses around it were not there 50-60 years ago.
my 2 cents
.
z1111,
Take a look:
https://www.redfin.com/WA/Auburn/1220-25th-St-SE-98002/home/213823
All photos and do also use the google map and also look through the neighborhood via street map view.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/M+St+SE+%26+25th+St+SE,+Auburn,+WA+98002/@47.2864863,-122.2139065,182m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x5490f7c3cc0c8ff1:0xf1d4cdcf6fb0cf26
Which of those photos are 50-60 years ago?
OMG you guys. This conversation is so ridiculous. It doesn't matter, because mansard roofs are ugly, always. Except in Paris.
Mansard roofs aren't necessarily ugly and they can be done nicely. It definitely doesn't seem like it was done in a decent way in this project.
No. Mansard roofs are ugly. Also this conversation. What. The. Hell?
z1111, of course none of them.
I'm not going into Auburn, WA to dig into their archives of photos of the neighborhood. There are telltale signs. There are quite a few houses there from the 50s/60s. Many have been remodeled. There is probably some information somewhere to support records of housing development.
Another give away for the time period of the 1950s/60s is the school. A common pattern of the time is that the school was built at its location after housing started being developed in that area. After all, it isn't in the downtown Auburn (technically the older part of Auburn) to the North as Auburn population grew to the south and southwest. A little history context, the housing was probably driven by Boeing. With Boeing building its sheet metal mill facilities and other facilities, was an economic 'fuel' to bring people to that area and the housing development occured along side all the industrial use of land.
Before hand, these tracts were farm land.
I don't have a complete historic context picture but just from a little quick & dirty research on the historic context of the area.
I have seen worse.
Yall need to smoke some weed and CHILL THE FUX OUT!!!
Josh and Donna,
I think we'll just agree to disagree. Mansard roofs is like the color orange. You can love or hate it but seldom just like it. It can be done horribly and therefore, ugly as fuck. It can sometimes be employed in a decent manner.
You shut your mouth. Orange is awesome.
(I may or may not have a bunch of orange in my house and may or may not have chosen it consistently as an accent color in my projects)
Yeah, ugly as hell.
In America it sucks 99% of the time.
I saw Donna's; this was aimed @ Josh's. The two images I posted weren't to defend ugly roofs (rooves?) ... just to note that we often use the term without clarifying that (in the US) we're usually talking about crappy fakes, not the real item.
I wouldn't know if it's 99% but I would agree that most of the time, mansard roofs used in post-Second Empire style is often poorly executed and often results in ugly design.
Back to the original topic:
http://blue.kingcounty.com/Assessor/eRealProperty/Detail.aspx?ParcelNbr=3021059075
Take note of the 1979 RENOVATION date indicated on this property. They probably aren't talking about minor remodels such as change of doors or change of windows within existing window openings. They are probably talking major renovations creating significant change in the face.
1979 is about right for the type of aggregate tilt up panels. This darker tone aggregate tilt up panels were popular in the 1970s while in the 60s, lighter tones were typically popular.
The B&W photo was probably 1979. In the 10-15 years after, the cedar shingles/shakes didn't grey out yet. By the 2000s the cedar shingles / shakes had begun to weather and lose its luster while the original owner who lived there had probably kept applying water sealer to protect the luster but over time, that stop being used and it dulled out to the darker brown color it is now and will begin to get more 'greyish-dark brown' over time.
Examples of major renovations that would be denoted on such a county records is major changes to the facade/elevation on the front, changes in the roof and other alterations that are physically significant and substantially visible and character changing/altering.
I think I found a clue in that mess.
Here's my theory of what happened: circa 1979
An attached garage was built (either replacing a carport or parking space to enclose a car). The front facade was changed out and a new front elevation was made. A new roof system was made replacing the old roof system (probably some kind of low pitch hip roof) with a mansard-ish style roof.
Actually, took another pass through the photos, it does look like some time in the 90s, they changed out the cedar shakes with something else (probably some kind of composition shingle). That was probably done before they 'grey'd out because of possible fire related concerns of wood shakes/shingles.
That pretty much covers a correction to the post I made April 21, 5:44AM (forum date/time stamp EST).
I've worked on a few perfectly nice Mansards/Second Empire style homes in the northeast US, built in the mid-late 1800's, following their popularity in France. To say they are all ugly shows a narrow viewpoint as to what good architecture looks like. Most modern architecture looks like crap to me, soulless self-important expressionism that it is, but that doesn't mean that it IS ugly, just that I don't like it.
They have been continuously built since their popularity in France. There is a perfectly fine example near my home that was built in 1962.
N_S,
It's not meant to really knock on orange. I'm using the colloquial phrase as an example base to illustrate the point. I have nothing against orange, just so you know.
^ Good...
Volunteer,
They haven't been as popular between the time frame of the Second Empire and the 1960-present neo-eclecticism. If you take note, this neighborhood of tract development was ranch style and all of them in that area of Auburn is probably post-WW II. If you note the 1979 renovation. This leads me to the belief the house was originally built as a ranch style. The front facade was changed dramatically as well as the roof form that is typical (my guess is hip roof) of ranch style into this mansard roof type. That B&W photo at the County Assessor's website (for that county of course), is probably circa-1979. Older photos of the house is probably in an 'special collections' kind of archive or is microfiched. My guess is that county didn't go through all the microfiche rolls to put photos and other information on their website.
There was a minor remodel in the mid to late 1990s, probably change of windows, some interior remodeling of the bathroom and kitchen and things like that. The 1979 renovation is probably referring to more major alterations like addition of an attached garage, change of the rood form and change of the front elevation.
The original cedar shakes/shingles on the mansard was still fairly cedar 'orange-ish' color by the 1990s (1990-1995 time frame given the model of cars in the photo and their style).That's only 10-15 years roughly. If it was built originally in the 1950s, with that roof form, I would argue that would would be 38-45 years. The cedar shingles/shakes would have weathered. In 1997, the cedar shakes/shingles were replaced with some kind of composite or was laid over the cedar. There was some other minor remodel work but at $7500, it wouldn't have been major. Replace some windows with vinyl windows. Replace some shingles/shakes and maybe a tiny remodeling of the bathrooms and kitchen (possibly).
The circa-1979 renovation was also noted and I suspect is more significant. To verify, I would argue for circa 1979 building permits & associated documents/drawings/etc. would need to be located for that property at the City Hall building department. There's no guarantee to find anything. Cities and counties typically had 'memory' problems for things prior to the 1960s, 1970s or 1980s (depends on the place, though).
My gut feeling is that the house was originally built as a modest suburban ranch style house. In the late 70s (circa-1979), the roof was changed from its original roof form to this mansard roof form. The front elevation was changed and some indication implies an attached garage was made. Whether it was originally a car port or just a spot where a car could park... I can't say definitively either way.
who fucking cares balkans. its shit. are you going to do any renovations on the place? its close to you. as a building designer, this should be right in your wheelhouse.
but that would require actual work on your part. so nevermind
The OP is actually a great craftsman. While he picked the biggest POS known to man he may turn it into something passable.
Dangermouse,
Currently, I already have a project. As for the OP, if he really wants to commission me, he can always contact me. I still have to decide if decent passable outcome can be achieved.
Neo-Balkins?
Cute!
just wondering how the OPs project turned out? Had a blast reading this thread 6+ years after the fact…
Here is my current project, a mid century neo mansard with orange accents- y’all’s favorite!
Change the entry and pull the shutters and that could be a very cool house!
I would call this style carwashy drivethroughy crappytechture.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.